BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

104 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 40A(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi104Mumbai93Rajkot28Raipur21Chennai21Hyderabad19Jaipur19Chandigarh17Allahabad17Indore15Surat14Visakhapatnam14Bangalore13Ahmedabad12Pune12Kolkata11Cuttack8Amritsar6Lucknow4Nagpur3Jodhpur2Dehradun1Ranchi1Patna1

Key Topics

Addition to Income81Section 40A(3)71Section 271(1)(c)71Disallowance62Penalty50Section 4038Section 143(3)35Section 10A28Section 153C26Deduction

JET LITE (INDIA) LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6 (NOW CC-1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 839/DEL/2019[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2024AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmajet Lite (India) Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 13, Community Central Circle-6, Centre, Yusuf Sarai, (Now Cc-1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadcs4480L

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT DR
Section 156Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

u/s 40A(3), due to disallowance of the 20% of expenses, it can be seen that this addition has been re-added as a result of re- assessment order dt. 08.03.2000 where the following payments were found to be via cash and (were) in excess of the limit set by section 40A(3). These payments were not specified

Showing 1–20 of 104 · Page 1 of 6

22
Section 143(2)19
Section 142(1)18

M/S. HIND INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6660/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediam/S. Hind Industries Ltd, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of A-1, Okhla Industrial Area, Income Tax (Appeals)-Xv, Phase-1, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaach0870N Assessee By : None Revenue By: Mr. Waseem Arshad, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30/08/2023

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT DR
Section 40A(3)

u/s 142(1) was asked to explain as to why cash purchases not be disallowed as per the provisions of section 40A(3) as was the treatment given to such cash purchases in AY 2004-05 to 2009-10. M/s. Hind Industries Ltd 4.3 In this regard the assessee in its reply stated that its case was covered by Rule

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 5475/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Respondent: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 153CSection 2(22)(e)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 5474/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Respondent: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 153CSection 2(22)(e)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI vs. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue, are dismissed

ITA 161/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Satyajit GoelFor Respondent: [CIT] – D. R
Section 144Section 144C(4)Section 271(1)(c)

penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act under identical circumstances observing as under:- “9. Learned Authorised Representative vehemently stated before us that cash payments have been made for purpose of purchase of Silver from MMTC to extent of Rs.24,24,212/- and balance payment of Rs.9,66,500/- is towards reimbursement of travel expenses to employees

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI vs. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue, are dismissed

ITA 162/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Satyajit GoelFor Respondent: [CIT] – D. R
Section 144Section 144C(4)Section 271(1)(c)

penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act under identical circumstances observing as under:- “9. Learned Authorised Representative vehemently stated before us that cash payments have been made for purpose of purchase of Silver from MMTC to extent of Rs.24,24,212/- and balance payment of Rs.9,66,500/- is towards reimbursement of travel expenses to employees

SS GROUP (P) LTD,HARYANA vs. ACIT CIRLCE-4(1), GURGAON, HARYANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1094/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumarm/S. Ss Group (P) Ltd., Vs. Acit, Circle 4 (1), Ss House, Plot No.77, Sector 44, Gurgaon. Sector 45, Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Aadcr8945B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.08.2025 Date Of Order : 17.09.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 07.02.2025 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Affirming The Penalty Order Dated 21.03.2022 Passed U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

40A(3) of the Act and had also bonafidely believed the same as not covered under the said section. 15. The assessee we hold ,cannot be charged with having concealed or furnished inaccurate particulars of income so as to impose penalty u/s 271

TAPI JWIL JV,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6722/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6722/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4873/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Tapi Jwil Jv, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O C. S. Anand, Adv., Ward-62(4), 104, Pankaj Tower, 10, L.S.C. New Delhi Savita Vihar, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadat3744J Assessee By : Sh. C. S. Anand, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Amitabh K. Sinha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. C. S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amitabh K. Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 271GSection 40A(2)(b)Section 928BSection 92D

40A(2)(b) and the ld. CIT(A) has also erred in determining the profit of the assessee @ 3.78% equal to the profit of one of the parties to the JV. Penalty u/s 271G: 11. Facts of the case are as under: The assessee M/s TAPI Prestressed Products Ltd. ('TPPL') and M/s JITF Water Infrastructure Ltd. ('JWIL') had entered into

TAPI JWIL JV,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4873/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6722/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 4873/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Tapi Jwil Jv, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O C. S. Anand, Adv., Ward-62(4), 104, Pankaj Tower, 10, L.S.C. New Delhi Savita Vihar, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadat3744J Assessee By : Sh. C. S. Anand, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Amitabh K. Sinha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. C. S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amitabh K. Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 271GSection 40A(2)(b)Section 928BSection 92D

40A(2)(b) and the ld. CIT(A) has also erred in determining the profit of the assessee @ 3.78% equal to the profit of one of the parties to the JV. Penalty u/s 271G: 11. Facts of the case are as under: The assessee M/s TAPI Prestressed Products Ltd. ('TPPL') and M/s JITF Water Infrastructure Ltd. ('JWIL') had entered into

ACIT, CIRCLE- 27(1), NEW DELHI vs. UNITECH LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 8914/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

section 271(1)(c) - Held, yes [Paras 8- 10] [In favour of assessee] Though the above judgment, is in respect of penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) r.w.S 40(a)(ia) of the Act, the ratio decidendi is equally applicable to the fact of the present case with respect to addition made u/s 40A(3

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Del/2016 filed by the assessee are allowed, accordingly the Assessment Orders dated 28

ITA 5470/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Respondent: “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Del/2016 filed by the assessee are allowed, accordingly the Assessment Orders dated 28

ITA 5469/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Respondent: “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3

DCIT, CIRCLE- 20(1), NEW DELHI vs. POLYPLEX CORPORATION LIMITED., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 701/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M.Balaganesh[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Dcit, Vs Polyplex Corporation Limited, Circle-20(1), 40, New Mandakini, Greater New Delhi Kailash, New Delhi-110092. Pan-Aaacp0278J Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr.Dr Respondent By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Shri Aman Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing 04.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.04.2024

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(2)(AB)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 90

271(1)(c) not attracted, for merely making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law by itself will not amount furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. In the present case also, the claim of the assessee was not accepted by the Assessing Officer for the sole reason that the assessee could not get the approval from DSIR till completion

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O. Nos. 26, 27 & 28/Del/2016 filed by the assessee are allowed, accordingly the Assessment Orders dated 28

ITA 5472/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O. Nos. 26, 27 & 28/Del/2016 filed by the assessee are allowed, accordingly the Assessment Orders dated 28

ITA 5471/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NAGAR DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O. Nos. 26, 27 & 28/Del/2016 filed by the assessee are allowed, accordingly the Assessment Orders dated 28

ITA 5473/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c); though no separate addition was made considering the disallowance of higher amount on account of bogus purchases. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in adjudicating the addition made under section 40A(3

ACIT SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 5922/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, are initiated .separately.” 40. During the appellate proceedings, the above said addition made by the A.O. has been confirmed by the CIT(A) in following manners:- “6.3 During the course of appellate proceedings, appellant has submitted that as per appellant's internal company policy, during the year the appellant reimburses

ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM & TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. , NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 5920/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, are initiated .separately.” 40. During the appellate proceedings, the above said addition made by the A.O. has been confirmed by the CIT(A) in following manners:- “6.3 During the course of appellate proceedings, appellant has submitted that as per appellant's internal company policy, during the year the appellant reimburses

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 4737/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, are initiated .separately.” 40. During the appellate proceedings, the above said addition made by the A.O. has been confirmed by the CIT(A) in following manners:- “6.3 During the course of appellate proceedings, appellant has submitted that as per appellant's internal company policy, during the year the appellant reimburses

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-3, NEW DELHI vs. DELHI TOURISM TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 4100/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 43B

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, are initiated .separately.” 40. During the appellate proceedings, the above said addition made by the A.O. has been confirmed by the CIT(A) in following manners:- “6.3 During the course of appellate proceedings, appellant has submitted that as per appellant's internal company policy, during the year the appellant reimburses